FLOTTENRICHTER KRANZBÜHLER: The term “merchant vessels.”
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): You have not got the citation there, have you?
FLOTTENRICHTER KRANZBÜHLER: Which is it?
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): The phrase in the London Agreement which you claim is ambiguous.
FLOTTENRICHTER KRANZBÜHLER: I have not got it here, but I can give a fairly accurate quotation. It says that submarines are subject to the same rules as surface vessels in their conduct towards merchant vessels.
I shall later submit proof that the term “merchant vessel,” even at the Washington Conference of 1922, was considered ambiguous, and that also in books on international law published later it had repeatedly been stressed that this term is ambiguous.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Dr. Kranzbühler, you want Admiral Nimitz to give us his opinion of his construction of the treaty, do you not? Isn’t that the purpose of these interrogatories?
FLOTTENRICHTER KRANZBÜHLER: No, I do not want to hear Admiral Nimitz’ opinion, but the policy pursued by the United States in its sea war against Japan.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will consider the arguments you have addressed to them, Dr. Kranzbühler.
FLOTTENRICHTER KRANZBÜHLER: I now turn to the documents. As I have just heard from Sir David, there are no objections on the part of the Prosecution. I do not know whether I need give my reasons for submitting the individual documents.